Interview impressions

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Baylor:
Houston was better than I expected....probably because it was the middle of winter when I was there. The houston medical megapolis is impressive if you have never seen it. That being said, there was no real home for the residents since they cover many different sites around the area (VA, Ben Taub, etc...). Not sure how much the residents actually see one another. The program will likely be completely different by the time 2010 rolls around. Apparently, Methodist hospital is establishing there own radonc department (and its own residency apparently) and many attendings were forced to make a choice (including the program director who treats peds). That being said, they say the residents would still rotate with him. Faculty and residents were all very nice and the lunch on interview day was a 10/10. Overall, there seems to be enough pieces in place for residents to gain strong clinical training in the end, but this program will be somewhat different by 2010 with the addition of some new treatment machines, new PD, and hospital affiliations. I would go and check it out.

UVA
I really liked Charlottesville. Small town with reasonable cost of living (high for college town standards). Great if you enjoy the outdoors and or are a Dave Matthews or Thomas Jefferson enthusiast. It looks like this is yet another program is purchasing a new cancer center from Newcancercenter.com. The facilities as of now are not bad. Lot's of TOMO research. Brachy is sufficient, LDR prostate and adequate GYN cases. Strong gamma knife program. Really no deficits in terms of technology or cases except maybe Peds.The program director was fantastic. He is one of the best I came across. Several faculty are very active in research at the national level. The chair is nice but somewhat quirky, but not in a negative way. He made a few comments that were so random I had to bite my tongue to not laugh out loud. He seems to be very involved and is great for the department though. The residents are a friendly group and would be great to work with. Overall great location, excellent facilities, clinical research if you want it, and nice faculty and staff. I would be happy to train there.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Overall: This program is going through a major restructuring process that looks to be quite painful in the next few years. A few years ago Baylor lost a major affiliation with Methodist hospital, but the RadOnc affiliation was spared at that time. Apparently Methodist has now chosen to start their own residency program, and the faculty were forced to choose between Methodist and Baylor. The program chair was forced to go with Methodist due to the affiliation with Texas Childrens with Methodist. This warzone is probably not the best place to be right now.

Location: Houston is smoldering hot, with amazon-like humidity. A huge city like Houston probably has perks that go along with the size, including restaurants and opportunities at the medical center. The cost of living also sounded fairly good, and the housing market has been relatively spared during this recession.

Faculty/Residents: Didn't get a good sense of the faculty while I was there. Several faculty members seemed new, and several faculty members were left out of the interview process. Some of the residents warned of some difficult "personalities" amongst the faculty, and none of the residents seemed enthused with their learning environment.

Department: Not really a centralized department. The residents staff several hospitals around the area, and none of them have stereotactic capabilities at the moment. Forget stereotactics, at one facility they still use only LDR. It was probably the most technologically-challenged program that I experienced while on the interview trail.

Research: What research? The residents all said that they had asked for time dedicated for research, but were told that past residents had been productive without dedicated research time. Therefore dedicated time obviously was not necessary. They also seem to be very busy at the various clinical sites, leaving little time for research except on the weekends.

My 2 cents: If you want a clinical-only program and don't mind the lack of research opportunities, it's definitely an option. The program will likely look very different after 2010 since several of the sites are building new treatment centers with stereotactic capabilities. Lots of unknowns here.
 
University of Pennsylvania

A great program, great location (for some) with a lot of great faculty with lot of research opportunities. Steve Hahn is probably the most dynamic chair out there. He seems like he would be a great advocate to have on your side.

Having said that, I had heard from friends who applied from the past two years that Penn was "amazing," "maybe the best training program out there." But now that the cancer center is open, just seems like there are more unknowns now. New faculty, supposed to be a lot more patients, unclear how this is going to affect resident work hours, etc etc. I didn't hear any other programs out there mention "occasional" Saturdays.

Most of the faculty were great. PD didn't seem all that warm and don't know how much of a resident advocate she would be. Seemed a bit snooty!

Don't get me wrong, I still thing Penn is a great program and anyone would be lucky to match there. It's just that I think there was so much hype that I was perhaps a little underwhelmed!
 
Members don't see this ad :)
University of Pennsylvania
I didn't hear any other programs out there mention "occasional" Saturdays.

Just for comparison, I know that at Anderson the on-call resident works at least 1 weekend day and if you're on gyn you're in as well to take care of the implant patients that were in-patient.

From the circuit there were definitely other programs that mentioned that the on-call resident would cover any saturday cases, like missed sessions or if someone started on a friday... so it doesn't seem that uncommon.
 
Overall: Yet another program in serious transition. It seems to have a history of being a decent program several years back, but the decline of the program seems to have paralleled the decline of the city of Detroit. They have decent facilities and a beautiful Karmanos cancer center, but they are lacking faculty and direction and the moment. There also seem to be at least one or two malignant faculty members on board. Some of the other faculty even said that they hope one or another faculty member will be fired when the new chairman steps in later this year.

Location: Deteroit is somewhat infamous, so I guess there's not much that needs to be said about the location. The auto industry is bankrupt, it's very cold, lots of crime, and lots of people looking for ways out of that city.

Faculty/Residents: There seems to have been a mass exodous of faculty in recent years. There has been an interim chairman for the past year or so, and it seems that the department is really struggling with the lack of faculty. They recently named a new chairman from Fox Chase, but unfortunately no one met him during the interview day. I'm sure he will bring on new faculty members to fill the void, but this program will take years and miracles to bring back to life. The residents seemed really overworked. The patient load is astronomical, and it doesn't seem that anyone is happy here. One resident even apparently left the program because she was so unhappy.

Department: Really cool futuristic tunnels were probably the best part of the entire program. The facilities seemed surprisingly nice, with new machines going in about every 2 years on average. Lots of Tomotherapy, Gamma knife, and a new rapid arc going in later this year. Everything is in place to build a decent mid-tier program, and lots of hope is being placed on the new chairman to turn things around. It will be an uphill battle to say the least.

Research: Several of the residents were dismayed with the utter lack of time for research. Great physics program with physics graduate students and a young and vibrant physics chair. Good potential fodder for research involvement there, but unfortunately the residents just don't seem to have the time to maximize this potential. Every resident in RadOnc is required to complete at least one research project before graduation. Several residents said that even meeting this minimal requirement was difficult given their ridiculous caseloads.

My 2 cents: If you can stand to live in the city of Detroit, this program is probably better than not matching at all. But if you like this area, there are several other good programs like Henry Ford and Beaumont that are much more stable.
 
Just for comparison, I know that at Anderson the on-call resident works at least 1 weekend day and if you're on gyn you're in as well to take care of the implant patients that were in-patient.

From the circuit there were definitely other programs that mentioned that the on-call resident would cover any saturday cases, like missed sessions or if someone started on a friday... so it doesn't seem that uncommon.

We're definitely not talking about being on call, coming in on weekends when you are on call is pretty much expected at every program.

We are talking about coming in likely every Saturday since Penn plans to have all the machines running 6 days a week on a full schedule. This might reasonably mean that only 1 resident would need to be in house to supervise, but given the aforementioned lack of faculty coverage this could quickly degenerate into Saturday becoming a full clinic day for faculty and residents alike.

It's hard to predict, and that's the scary part.
 
We're definitely not talking about being on call, coming in on weekends when you are on call is pretty much expected at every program.

We are talking about coming in likely every Saturday since Penn plans to have all the machines running 6 days a week on a full schedule. This might reasonably mean that only 1 resident would need to be in house to supervise, but given the aforementioned lack of faculty coverage this could quickly degenerate into Saturday becoming a full clinic day for faculty and residents alike.

It's hard to predict, and that's the scary part.
Did they say why they were going to treat patients 6 days a week?
 
I ranked them for s**** and giggle. There was a 3-way tie for for 7th palce. Rankings are biased by where I would like to live. I interviewed at other places too that have been discussed ad nauseum on SDN and I can't add much. About me: I'm a non-traditional with all the caveats. I am looking for excellent clinical training, research opportunities (translational), and a positive working environment. My view is that as a resident you are trading long hours for little money and for that you deserve the best training that you can find and to be treated with respect. Ultimately I want to be an academic. I also want to be prepared during my residency to anticipate, appreciate and adapt to the changes that inevitably await this field :

Rush (9): The chair of this department is prickly. but during my interview, he was candid about my application and provided me with some advice about how to present myself at future interviews (this ultimately proved valuable ). I do think he's quite smart. Rush has a pretty department but there are no opportunities to do laboratory science. The residents didn't seem unhappy. The other clinical faculty in this very small department seemed like nice, academically minded folks.

Georgetown(7): I was pleasantly surprised. Georgetown is pretty but expensive. The physically plant is okay, standard basement set up with a second level if I remember correctly that was nicer. The faculty were nice. The program is small (I think there are currently 4 residents and they have been approved to add 2 more). There is some lab-based research being performed by one long time faculty member as well as by one of the new younger faculty. The residents seemed well cared for, had balance in their lives, and I would guess are mostly headed to PP. The interim chairman is apparently a genius but seems pretty hands off, at least in respect to resident recruitment.

Hopkins(4): The part of Baltimore that Hopkins lies in is terrible. For me, Hopkins would have to be really really fantastic to overcome that, and as far as rad onc departments go, I think it almost is. Physical plant: awesome, research facilities especially. Chair: awesome (at least as far as salesmanship is concerned). The residents seemed happy enough. The other staff whom I met with were nice.

Yale(3): Beats out Hopkins purely based on the suckiness of Baltimore relative to New Haven. The new cancer center is going to be awesome. Wilson is great. The staff seemed fine. Very supportiev of radbio research. The residents seemed a mix of tight-laced/laid back. New Haven isn't great. Most residents live in suburban CT. 20% of your time (read 1 day a week) you will be driving to one of the off site facilities.

UPENN(2): New cancer center is very very nice. Mention of working Saturdays was scary to me. Steve Hahn is a force of nature. The staff that I met seemed bright and conversation veered away from RO quite often. The residents were an intimidatingly focused bunch. UPENN did not seem terribly laid back in any sense and for me that is a minus. I'll trade it for superb training any day but not necessarily for good training, reputation, protons, Steve Hahn, or a new cancer center, which in my opinion is what UPENN currently offers. It's ranking is based mainly upon perceived research opportunities, size, Philly, and prestige.

Tufts (7): This is kind of a dingy department in the basement of a building near Boston's Chinatown district. 4 residents. Time is split (evenly, I think) between there and facilities in Providence (that would be in another state), which we heard are nicer but we didn't get to see them. The Chairman was very friendly and he seemed smart and helpful.The faculty (at least at the Boston site) do not all specialize by disease site. That is not necessarily a minus although I guess to me it was. Beantown is great. Harvard is Goliath though. There is some rad bio here and at least one of the residents had an impressive oral presentation at ASTRO on a clinical project and is interviewing for academic positions. In short, I am sure you would get a fine education here and could go academic or PP if you desired, but if you chose to live in Boston you would be looking at 45 minute commutes each way for a good portion of your training.

UNC(6): The department is small (6 residents), a similar number of faculty. Very supportive of lab research. The chairman seemed asked us to send in our college transcripts (I knew that B I got in in organic chemistry would come back to haunt me).

UC Davis(7): They have a brand new chair (a guy who comes from Thomas Jefferson), a very young PD, a well known physics guy, and a few other clinical staff (3 that we met a recent graduate from UCI, their clinical director, and a CNS guy who is leaving). They are a very young department. Their first graduate (I think 1 or two years ago) got a job at U Washington though. Otherwise they have 4 residents. There was some hubbub with a resident leaving during her training and word is that she decided to switch to IM. They also had a substantial staff turnover in the last few years, an out with the old in with the new kind of deal as the department geared itself up to be an academically oriented residency training program by the hands of the former chair who has since left. The facilities are nice, the cancer center in which they reside is only a few years old by the looks of things. The program is in Sacramento, it is provincial, but not a bad town. Residents work longer than average hours. I think didactics started at some ungodly hour (7 am?), and I guess the program needs to be pretty serious about that sort of thing because it is still establishing itself. Would you feel like a bit if a guinea pig? Yes you would, but my impression is that you could do alright here and maybe even get more attention that you would at a bigger established program that no longer needs to prove itself.

U Washington(5): The PD at this program said during his introductory remarks that all students get 3 months of research guaranteed and that if we were productive we would get another 3 months. By that token, laboratory-based research is effectively discouraged. The faculty and residents I met were for the most part friendly, quirky folks, if you fit in, you fit in, if you don't, you don't was my read. The physical plant is low to average. I could not read the chair at all, he has a physics PhD and seemed hands-off as far as the residency program is concerned. Seattle is a wonderful city and I wish they supported research more.

Thomas Jefferson(8): New chair, super smart guy who seems eager to recruit research-minded folks and I'm sure he would support you like hell in such endeavours, another prickly pear though. PD is also somewhat without humor. The residents seemed happy enough though. The physical plant is pretty ugly. One question that loomed for this me is what effect UPENN's growth spurt will have on their business. Also, the program seemed super unfun (they assign grades for your rad bio and physics courses, that is uncalled for).

Wash U (1): Of all the places I interviewed (these places plus 4 upper tier programs), I thought that Wash U was the most impressive. St Louis is not NY, Philly, Boston, San Francisco, LA, or Chicago, but this program kicks the ass of most programs in those cities. The facilities are amazingly nice, both in terms of the CC as a whole and the department itself. What impressed me the most other than that is their commitment to research, both laboratory-based and clinical. Some of how their department is structured research-wise is unique,such as their BIOR program. They also have a grand rounds that is even attended by PP folks in the area, which is not something I heard of or saw anywhere else. I got the best vibe from this place all around from the faculty and residents, all of whom seemed happy, confident in their education, and without pretense. Finally, the quality of oncology research as a whole here is top notch and unlike some other places, Rad Onc residents are encouraged to participate in it.
 
Please insert the word "trappings" for "caveats" in the above posting. My bad.
 
Who is the new chair of jefferson?
 
UNC
Location: Chapel Hill/ Durham has a small city,college town feel to it. Nicely situated equidistant from the Appalachians and the coast. Relatively cheap in Durham where most residents live.
Training: Overall above average. Weak point would be brachytherapy. Right now residents rotate at a community hospital in Raleigh for this experience although there are plans to hire someone for this. Calypso here, strong stereotactics. Great rad bio and physics teaching. The Rad bio doc does some of the board questions. They have there own planning system called PLUNC which is plus/minus according to some of the residents. Great for research and easy to manipulate but not as user friendly as some of the other systems out there. Research is somewhat expected and there is ample opportunity for bench or physics related projects. New cancer center is actually going to be operational very soon and the entire department will be moving into the new space. Apparently the state of NC has committed a lot of dollars into making it a premiere cancer center. UNC draws patients from throughout the state.
Faculty: They have a new chair from Duke who seems a bit intense but probably will do well in the position. Dr. Tepper is here and is apparently great to work with. Right now there are only 4 residents but they may be taking as many as 3 this year.
Overall I would say this is a small program with a very academic feel that is legitimately undergoing major positive changes by 2010.
 
Wayne State
Location: Detroit. The rumors are true, but I tend to think it's not as bed as everyone thinks. You will definitely be able to buy a house if you are willing to take the risk. Most residents live out in the suburbs. Karmanos cancer center is nice, but the department itself is definitely old.
Training: High volume clinical training with somewhat dated technology. Strong in Gyn brachy and no problem with Peds. Weak in prostate brachy but you can rotate at Beaumont to make up for some cases there. Gamma knife experience and also an ancient neutron therapy suite that was pretty neat to see, but as you can imagine was somewhat run down. Apparently the new chair is big on firing the old thing up again for treatments. I got the impression that teaching is so-so and research is not the norm.
Faculty: New chair to start soon from Fox Chase. This program has been chairless for sometime which does make you wonder.
Overall, decent clinical training. Program will be going through some restructuring by 2010...hopefully for the positive.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Some thoughts on programs out west. I could be wrong, but these are my own impressions.

Overrated:

1. UCSF: Great location, beautiful city, powerhouse reputation, but frankly, this program left a lot to be desired. Residents seemed unhappy (a few even anti-social); faculty somewhat standoff-ish and aloof. Unless you're a Holman resident, doesn't seem like research is a priority, or teaching for that matter. My impression was that the lack of faculty involvement in didactics was a sore spot in the program. According to one resident, the chair (Roach) is an egomaniac who doesn't really 'waste' his time dealing with residents. They've also had 3 PDs in 3 years? And my feeling was that residents aren't really supported and viewed as scut labor. As of late, nearly all graduating seniors have gone private practice.

2. U-Washington: Very similar to UCSF, but the residents seemed a little happier. They've recently had an infusion of young faculty who are more keen about didactics. Still, the amount of research going on here seemed absymal and according to one resident, all of the graduating seniors go into private practice without a second thought. Supposedly, ancillary services at UW are lacking and residents end up doing a lot of scut and don't get a whole lot back in terms of teaching or research opportunities. Having the residency spread out over several sites in the city also is a nuisance. My impression was that Dr. Laramore is a chair who is not really visible and that the PD (Douglas) was tough on residents.

3. UCLA: Light-years away from being anything close to a structured residency program still. This place, apart from being physically ugly, just felt chaotic and unorganized. The irony is that the university just completed an enormous, beautiful new hospital, yet left the rad onc department in the 'old' unit. The new chair (Steinberg) was hired directly from private practice and while nice enough, doesn't really seem to have a clue about how to run a residency. Supposedly, he is trying to surround himself with academic types to enhance the residency experience. The PD (Lee) himself told me that he wasn't really sure what would happen to the residency in the near future. That can't be good.

4. Utah: Gorgeous department in a 'post-card pretty' cancer center. The residents seemed fairly happy, but the one consistent complaint was the utter lack of didactics. I was told the clinical volume more than made up for this (attendings 'teach' on the job)- but the residency seemed to lack any structure. Research opportunities seemed hit or miss. The PD (Hitchcock) was pleasant but according to one source really isn't much of an advocate for the residents.


Underrated:

1. UT-Southwestern: If it weren't for the location (In my opinion, Dallas is a complete hole), this program would have been at the top of my rank list. The chair (Choy) was about as charismatic a leader as anybody that I met on the interview trail. This place is emerging as an academic power and residents seem to have ample opportunity, in fact, are encouraged to do research. Drs. Choy and Timmerman, notably are huge names in thoracic oncology and are both resident-friendly and approachable. The PD (Spangler) seemed to be very easy to work with. UTSW felt like a place where residents finish well-trained in both the clinical and research side of rad onc. The sky is the limit for this program.

2. UC-Davis: Like UTSW, a very young program (I think both were started in 2003-04?). And again, a place where the energy and positive direction of the department is palpable. Although I arrived for my interview at Davis not really thinking much of this program (and hearing the rumors about a department in disarray), I left very impressed. Probably one of the best organized interview days on the circuit, starting with a morning roundtable with the chair (Valicenti), PD (Chen), and head of physics (Purdy). I had the impression (and I heard it over and over) that this was a place where residents are valued and respected. The PD, who gave an impressive overall of the research initiatives (all head and neck) happening in the department and a summary of resident projects, was the most easygoing and friendly of all the PDs I met. This is a program on the rise.

3. OHSU: A nice little program up in the Pacific Northwest. Both the chair (Thomas) and PD (Holland) seemed like resident advocates and good people to work for. The resident seemed happy with a nice case load. Portland is a great city and the residents actually seem to have time to enjoy it. Research opportunities are plentiful- although I'm not too sure about basic science-type work. I've heard nothing but positive things about OHSU.

4. Colorado: It's true that this program is dominated by their expertise in stereotactic radiation. My opinion is that this is the real hallmark of this department with people like Drs. Kavanaugh, Gaspar, and Schefter. I was told the clinical load in other areas is somewhat light. Still, this seemed like a place where one could be a very happy resident and engage in some cutting-edge research if one wanted to. Both graduating residents, I was told, compiled impressive research publications during their stay at Colorado and were considering academic careers.
 
I love how "residents going into private practice" is akin to "lousy didactics" or "poor facilities" ... i.e. a weakness.

80% of graduates go into private practice. Someone has to treat all the patients out there with cancer. That's what most docs do. It shouldn't be a black mark. Some people actually like that part of the job.

-S
 
I love how "residents going into private practice" is akin to "lousy didactics" or "poor facilities" ... i.e. a weakness.

80% of graduates go into private practice. Someone has to treat all the patients out there with cancer. That's what most docs do. It shouldn't be a black mark. Some people actually like that part of the job.

-S

Let's face up to the fact that the programs themselves encourage this type of attitude; by talking up their Holman all-stars, by focusing on applicants' research portfolios, and by fawning over the MD/PhDs, how can applicants not conclude that a failure to produce academics isn't a weakness? That is what many of these places explicitly say is their goal. When they fail to achieve that, why wouldn't the applicants question quality?

The minute programs take a more laissez faire attitude towards the production of academicians is the minute that applicants will stop over-valuing the above statistic.
 
I love how "residents going into private practice" is akin to "lousy didactics" or "poor facilities" ... i.e. a weakness.

80% of graduates go into private practice. Someone has to treat all the patients out there with cancer. That's what most docs do. It shouldn't be a black mark. Some people actually like that part of the job.

-S

I only applied to and interviewed at radiation oncology programs associated with universities. I am not even aware of programs that are not university or cancer center based. Are there any?

Academic programs from all specialties, in general, intend to train future academic physicians. However, unlike medicine or surgery that has many community based programs where entering private practice is the norm for residents, radiation oncology does not have too many community based programs.

For a person who intends to become an academic physician, I ranked programs lower if there was a trend for residents to go into private practice.
 
I only applied to and interviewed at radiation oncology programs associated with universities. I am not even aware of programs that are not university or cancer center based. Are there any?

Academic programs from all specialties, in general, intend to train future academic physicians. However, unlike medicine or surgery that has many community based programs where entering private practice is the norm for residents, radiation oncology does not have too many community based programs.

For a person who intends to become an academic physician, I ranked programs lower if there was a trend for residents to go into private practice.

Plenty of university-based programs can train you well, but still have many of their graduates go on to private practice. It's just the nature of the field, and IMO does not reflect poorly on the program itself. Just because a program is affiliated with a university or academic center does not mean that their graduates are more likely to go on to academics.

As SimulD alluded to, we need cancer docs who treat cancer patients.
 
the one consistent complaint was the utter lack of didactics

didactics are nice, but a little overrated on this forum IMO. At the end of the day, you still need to go home and read. While didactics may spoon feed you some of what you need to know, you can't expect to master the material on your own without being a self-starter.
 
To add to RadOnc rudy
Henry Ford: In Detroit which obviously has some negative associations, but I did like this program more than I thought I would. The facilities were nice, pretty standard. My most positive interactions were actually with the new physics director who was very eager to have residents get involved with research as well as the radiobiologist who had an infectious enthusiasm for his research. All of the faculty were extremely nice, and it seems that the whole department is really pushing for more of a basic research focus. Biggest strengths were treating spinal tumors and gene-therapy for prostate ca, both areas of which they do a lot of research. The residents all seemed happy with their training and the program with the exception fo one disgruntled resident who seemed mad about being given less research time than another resident...pretty much he just had a bad attitude. The other residents were very happy here and said that if you are interested in research, basic or clinical, there is support to do that. Overall, I liked this program a lot more than I thought I would, the biggest disadvantage though was that the program is in detroit.


Sorry if some of these aren't totally complete...I'm going off memory & general impressions.[/quote


My comments:
The malcontent resident was unhappy b/c I was told that Ford's Chairman played favorites with research. One chief resident did prostate gene therapy research and the other did SBRT (spinal SBRT w/ Sam Ryu is a strength there too ). The one who did SBRT research was shorted but he did get to go to a conference on the subject later in the year with the other chief-resident. The strong negative per "the disgruntled" resident about this program was that he had done roughly 700 cases doing many, many late nights, while the other had done 450-500 cases by the end of residency. I was told that this was just above the minimum required for one resident and almost the maximum allowed for the other for accreditation purposes. Talk about skewed responsibilities!

I was told if you were interested in SBRT to strongly try another program and that the morning presentation was a dog and pony show. Positives: they have a well organized up to date inch thick break down of system RT notes. The program director is new and impressive so things may have changed, but the old PD who may have been a contributor to the program...his first questions out of his mouth was: what was your step 1, what was your step 2, what was your surgery score and what was your internal medicine score. The Chief Physicist is from Michigan and is new and passionate about research there. Talking with him made my day, but I was very angry I had paid the money to fly to Detroit to interview there. As with almost all Rad Onc programs, no one really tried to sell it us. The feeling is that b/c it is RO it would be a privilege to train there.
 
Last edited:
Plenty of university-based programs can train you well, but still have many of their graduates go on to private practice. It's just the nature of the field, and IMO does not reflect poorly on the program itself. Just because a program is affiliated with a university or academic center does not mean that their graduates are more likely to go on to academics.

As SimulD alluded to, we need cancer docs who treat cancer patients.

There is a great need for oncologists outside of academia; however, as someone who intends to go into academics I found it quite useful to know which programs had a track record of residents staying in academics. This is not an issue about being trained well clinically; this is more about being trained appropriately for ones career path. Therefore, for certain applicants it is a perceived weakness when residents gravitate towards private practice, just as there are applicants who would consider a 1 year research requirement as a weakness.
 
Sorry I'm holding out until I find out where I match... Will post impressions on Thurs.

On to other notes, 12 Rad Onc spots unfilled this year :eek: what happened?
 
Before finding out that I matched at the bottom of my list, some thoughts:

Univ of Rochester (NY) - Some very impressive staff including the chair, lots of research funds, medium sized program. Affordable living, nice hospital, decent facilities, etc. Downside is the current residents: the majority were outside of the match, they don't seem happy to be there, and weren't the most impressive of the residents I've met on the trail. The program did match applicants last year (not sure if 2 or 3 - saw different reports), so maybe the incoming PGY-2s will change the dynamics of the place, but that was the biggest issue with the place. I know someone who interviewed for a staff position there, and had a similar feeling of the place - if the staff and research funds were coupled with better residents, this would clearly be a strong program.

U Penn - Ok, many things have been said about this place, and there are many different thoughts on it. With the new cancer center up and running, and protons not on a drawing board, but actually with a working accelerator (still working towards testing before patient treatment, as far as I know), this training program has all the toys you'd like. What impressed me most is that they not only built the new center, but also have a plan to design clinical trials for all treatment modalities for the protons. Spoke with one physics staff who was telling me about the in-room PET scanner they are setting up to be able to measure the actual treatment distribution of the protons - something other places mention as a "to-do" but not "implemented". Not to forget, the program has long been a top-tier program, and I think with the new facilities is clearly a top-5 program (IMHO). The big downside is the changes that the department must end up undergoing as it transitions into a space twice the size and with the goal of treating twice the patients. The upside to this is that there is opportunity. And by the time the next crop of folks interview, some of these issues should be ironed out.

UNC - One of the outstanding programs to see. Most faculty have tenure over a decade. When you go to other programs and hear how they fly someone in to teach their residents radiation biology, half the time Zeman will come up as the name of the teacher - who is at UNC. Grab a textbook on Rad Onc? You might see Tepper's. The list goes on. Despite the small size, everyone is known. Decent area, nice residents, new facilities that we did not see at the time. New chair (former Duke PD) seemed like a nice guy. The program size of 1 per year seemed small. However, they got an increase this year - my only concern would be if they use their increase this year to have 3 residents in one year (especially if they fill 2 spots in the scramble, which it appears they will try to), this would likely dilute the quality of their resident pool.

Wash U - One of the programs that tends to grace tops of match lists. Great history of placing folks academically, nice residents and staff, excellent clinical facilities, hopefully will maintain basic science research now that Powell left. The main issue is the program director, whose interview style is to sit there and say "I don't have questions". Upon probing, he says that he tried it one year instead of having an interview / conversation with the applicants, and came up with the same ranklist as the chair at the time (did not clarify which chair), so ever since he decided it's not worthwhile to have a conversation with applicants who have likely traveled hundreds or thousands or miles to interview there. He just prefers to sit and listen to whatever they have to say. By itself, this may be ok if there is a strong chair who can and does communicate, so you have someone you can work with - but when there is only an acting chair who doesn't really have the same status as a chair, you have to ask yourself - when you need something, who can you talk to? I suppose there are still fellow residents to help you along. Other folks didn't mind his style, so I would still check the program out, just have prepared a 30-minute monologue.

Georgetown - Interviewed 10 for 2 (best odds around). Disorganized interview day where staff are seeing patients and you are shuttled around, waiting. There was no organized tour of the main facility, which was not very impressive. Very nice residents stayed and spoke with us, however. Trip back and forth to a second hospital they just started rotating residents at (former Howard residency rotation site, I believe) was a lot more impressive, with a clean facility, and welcoming staff. The trip itself however wasted a bit of time, ask about it and if you have a car maybe drive yourself to save the trip back through DC (30 mins each way). Now the good things: PD is a former chair, semi-retired, but very nice. Has a basic science lab, lots of opportunity there. The program also has two Cyber Knifes, which crank out quite a bit of research. Overall, lacking in presentation but if you look, there is lots of clinical + research opportunity here. Cost of living - very expensive, despite the many surrounding suburbs, because everyone commutes.
 
Don't mean to jack the thread but it's just entertaining that >90% of interviewees say they will become academicians, <30% do, and that is the fault of a program, say the M4s. You can become an academic physician if you want to. This has very little to do with what program you go to. You just have to want to do it. There's a lot of jobs out there.

On the only program I know (my own), we all get 9-12 months protected lab or clinical research time - no clinical responsibilities at all. I'm in the lab right now. Yet, none of the past (or future) graduating residents have a strong desire to become academic docs. If we wanted to, our chairman and program director would do everything in their power to set that up. It's up to the resident.

It's so much harder to get that sweet practice job with partnership potential in Evanston, IL or Newport Beach, CA, or the Upper East Side. That's a mark of a good program. I want to know who's graduating the private practice docs practicing in the Pearl District in Portland or Santa Barbara or Downtown Seattle or Scottsdale. Shoot me an email if you can get me a job in Fairfax County or the Central Coast. That's what I'm talking about.

-S
 
It's so much harder to get that sweet practice job with partnership potential in Evanston, IL or Newport Beach, CA, or the Upper East Side. That's a mark of a good program. I want to know who's graduating the private practice docs practicing in the Pearl District in Portland or Santa Barbara or Downtown Seattle or Scottsdale. Shoot me an email if you can get me a job in Fairfax County or the Central Coast. That's what I'm talking about.

-S

In fact, recent graduates of UCSF have landed awesome private practice jobs in Portland, OR and Seattle, WA. Despite all the "overrated" talk, they can still pick the cream of the crop from the applicant pool each year. Having connections at key places throughout the country is helpful, too.

It really depends on what you want to get out of residency, but the mark of a good program (for the secret majority of you who want to go to private practice) should be whether graduating residents can go wherever they choose, not necessarily all in the academia.
 
Last edited:
UT Southwestern: The good: An up-and-coming program with a very energetic chair (Choy) who is running the department with a free hand (he has his own budget - the funds that Rad Onc make go back into the department). This allows the department to have all the latest technology, and if you listen to what they have, few places have such a wide variety of toys from different vendors to learn from and study. There are a couple other seasoned staff, in the clinic and in research. The research was impressive, for example they are building a tomotherapy for small animals for research! The bad: There are some newer staff, and the PD was not the most impressive. The residents say Choy moves things where the PD won't, however, so this is not a biggie. The bigger issue is that the residency is new, there is no track record, and the senior residents were out-of-match transfers. Additionally, this year they did not fill through the match (interviewed too few for the spots they had).

UMDNJ: Interview there if you have ties to the boss (every resident and staff there has ties, even if it was undergrad lab research many years prior). If you don't have ties, rotate there, and do research in his lab. I got the sense that grades, etc did not matter as much as long as you did the former. Great residents who feel well taken care of. Minus: Department only a few years old, no track record, no residents that matched here (vs. transferred) graduated yet.

Indiana: Good: One of the few programs with protons (albeit, at an hour's drive). Medium sized program. The chair is nice. Bad: Program was recently restructured, shall we say, and there are maybe 2 staff that were there from before this. The proton center being part of the program is fairly new, and it is unclear how it will work out. Interview day is individual, which means it is during clinic for the staff.

Kentucky: The good: Integrated prelim surgery (yikes? - NOT!) year is cush compared to many prelim Medicine years, with q5 or rarer call most of the time, several months without call. Great residents. The best-run interview day, hands down. You interview with both staff and residents (it's a small program, so it is doable). PD seems genuinely interested in his residents. Program has a variety of toys. The bad: No dedicated research time, although there is support if you are interested.

Case Western: Program in transition - PD has been there for about 1 year now, former chair left and there is an ongoing search. A few staff that have been around for a few years, and some recent hires. Residents are a good bunch. A new cancer center is being built, but the new department isn't big enough for all the machines, so when it comes online in 2010 or so, the department will be physically split. And, it's in Cleveland. Interviewed about 30 for 1 spot this year.

Cleveland Clinic: Chair has a strong vision and drive for the department. Clearly trying to build up the reputation of the staff and department. Program director loved by the residents, who have nothing but good things to say of him. Medium-sized program, great residents, good support staff. Great clinical education and research. Little basic science research unless you work hard to find it, but a recent grad did just that (and now is in academics). Most grads in last 3 years are in academic positions. Downside for some: Cleveland.

Iowa: Very spiffy and large facilities (not sure how old the department is, but it was very clean and felt modern). PD very interested in bettering the program. Toys such as a MRI and PET/CT in the department (if memory serves) which should allow more interesting research, if you're into that kind of thing. Basic science opportunities also. Residents are very friendly, and there seemed to be a high female to male ratio for Rad Onc among residents (though not staff). Mid-size program, so you won't go through training alone.

Med College of Wisconsin: High ratio of female to male in both the staff and the residents - unlike many other programs where female rolemodels are scarce. Very strong clinically (including lots of toys), but research is a bit scant (except for retrospective stuff - there's a requirement for submitting abstracts yearly if I recall correctly). New cancer center. You get to carry your folder with LORs, etc from staff to staff. Don't forget to thank the coordinator after you go!
 
UMDNJ
Overall, I thought this was one of the best programs in the greater NY area. Dr. Haffty, the Chair, has assembled a vast amount of resources under his command at this relatively young and blossoming program. He is extremely well published in the field of breast cancer and particularly in translational breast cancer research, and has an abundance of resources both at UMDNJ and from his connections at Yale that seem to be made available to the residents for research. Compared to several other programs I visited that had strong translational research programs, this one seemed to have the potential to be the most streamlined for resident productivity, if one were to pursue a project within Dr. Haffty's niche. As for the rest of the faculty, they are fairly young, but were all very nice and seemed genuinely interested in resident learning and happiness. The residents on whole seemed very pleased with the program, and were especially fans of having a full protected academic day (Friday) each week for didactics. The downside of that day is that it is a reflection of the relatively low clinical case volume the department sees, due largely to the heavy private rad onc competition in the NJ area. They have lots of toys and have protons supposedly in the works, but it didn't seem like they had all that many patients being treated on them (~80 on treatment at a time, from what I recall). However, they were trying to bolster this by adding a Newark site (~30 minutes away) and potentially the Orange County VA hospital, which would also add to their meager prostate brachy case volume. Despite my reservations about clinical case volume, UMDNJ seemed overall like an excellent program that will continue to improve under Dr. Haffty's visionary leadership.

Columbia
This program really threw all the candidates I met on the interview for a curve. Dr. Chao, the new Chair from MDACC, has made a number of substantial changes to the program and is planning many more. However, given that the program is on probation due to their former leadership's lack of interest in the residency, i'm not sure this means all that much. They currently have 2 machines, a trilogy and a 2100EX, which is truly tiny for any program, especially one with 6 residents. They claim their volume is fine, but I have heard stories of residents having to "fight" for cases in order to get their numbers. This was largely due to referral patterns within the hospital in the past, which will change with time, but how soon? They're brachy volume is also tiny and they have virtually no SRS yet, so the program is still fairly archaic. Out of the 8 or so interviews, only 3 were with clinical faculty, including Dr. Chao, with the other two being the new assistant program director Jinesh Shah (trained at Columbia) and a new recruit who did a brachy fellowship at MSKCC. They're both very young (maybe 2-3 years out of training) and new hires of Dr. Chao. Apparently he's already turned over a lot of their department, and the fact that he didn't even let us see the other clinical faculty suggests to me that they are on their way out soon enough. Dr. Chao also promised a department expansion (structurally) with the addition of 3-5 machines, although the current economic climate in the New York may preclude that from happening anytime soon. On the upside, Dr. Chao and Dr. Shah have been very responsive to resident concerns regarding didactics, and thus have instituted a completely new curriculum replete with med onc and peds onc lecture series. Didactics does seem like one of the program's strengths, however, I don't think that can ever make up for clinical experience, which as I mentioned may be lacking here. Another big plus is the cancer biology and radiobio programs, which are very strong. This program might be great in 3-5 years, but for me there was just too much current uncertainty to rank it highly.


UVA
A decent program with lots of Tomo-based research. They cover 3 sites, one of which you have to drive out 30 minutes to and at which the residents are basically scut monkeys for the semi-private attendings. Other than this situation, the residents seems happy, and the faculty were all very nice and seemed quite experienced. However, this program had several glaring drawbacks in my mind. The clinical volume was truly scant, with only about 60-80 pts on treatment across all 3 sites. As a result, the residents end up being on service for ~45 months out of the 4 years to end up with about 550 cases each, a shockingly low number for that much service time. As a result, the residents have a lot of free time to read or do research. If you want to do some Tomo case studies or planning studies, great. Unfortunately, there is basically no research support in the department outside the physics department (which I noted was quite strong), and while Dr Larner, the chair, does run an active lab with a strong translational research focus, it is impossible to get protected research time to do anything substantial. I think you get 3 months, broken up over 4 years, to do research, which is virtually useless IMHO. Additionally, their didactic schedule seemed sorely lacking and there did not seem to be a heavy emphasis on knowing the literature. Add this all up and you get a program with low clinical experience, minimal didactics and a lack of protected research time. That said, everyone did seem very happy, but I was personally looking for somewhere a little more serious for my training.

More reviews to come.... (I hope I'm not too negative, just trying to give my candid pro's and con's of the programs I was lucky enough to interview at...)
 
Fox Chase Cancer Center
Loved this program. The 8 residents here are extremely well trained, owing in large part to the high clinical volume (>150 pts per day, I believe) and the very strong didactics, which are really more conference based than lectures, personally my preference. They see basically everything, with the only notable deficiencies being peds and CNS, mostly because there is no neurosurgery department there to get in house referrals from. It is a small cancer center, the upside of which is that residents are treated essentially as fellows and have direct access to great attending in the other departments, many of which are nationally reknowned and very academically active. As mentioned on this board, the rad onc faculty has recently undergone some attrition, with the loss of Dr. Pollack to Miami and the recent loss of Dr. Konski to Wayne State. The current interim chair is Dr. Horwitz, who is no slouch as incoming head of the American Brachytherapy Society, and a great guy all in all. The other faculty are also great teachers and well published in their own rights, but are certainly less senior and have less prominent reputations, which may matter for getting academic jobs after residency, but probably not otherwise. As mentioned here as well, there is no current chair of either Med Onc or Surg Onc, nor a current Cancer Center C.O.O. (i think). FCCC also seems to be in some financial trouble currently, which may limit it's ability to recruit top notch faculty in the future, a definite concern for anybody signing on for 4 years there. As far as research, it is largely clinical within the department, with the benefits of an extensive patient database that is maintained by a data manager with in-house statistics. Basically, the residents can ask the data staff to query whatever patients they want, set their staging/treatment parameters, and crank out an abstract or publication in no time. As such, they are very well published by the end of residency and can produce extremely impressive CV's, although mostly based on retrospective data. For basic/translational research, you can get protected time of up to 1 year, but will need to find labs outside the department to do your work, which may be a potential drawback for someone looking for that niche. In summary, a great cancer center with great clinical experience and excellent teaching, although the current uncertainty in the leadership throughout the cancer center and the financial situation were somewhat worrisome for me.
 
Last edited:
University of Cincinnati
Location: Cincinnati seems like a nice place to live. Typical midwestern city ammenities. Barret Cancer center is close to downtown next to the University Hospital, VA and Cincinnati hildrens Hospital. There is also an apparently beautiful facility 25 min north where each attending (and his/her resident) goes to once a week.
Training: The program has a lot to offer in terms of technology. TOMO at the satellite facility, trilogy, a lot of prostate brachy, and tons of peds b/c of the affiliation with the Cincinnati Childrens. Didactics and teachings sound decent. 6 total residents. Most residents are doing clinical projects. Not much in terms of basic science.
Faculty and residents: The faculty and residents here were some of the nicest and most laid back that I have met. Everyone seems very happy. I got the sense that the learning enviornment is very casual.
Overall, great clinical training in a laid back enviornment.
 
Case Western

Smaller program with 5 residents who really do seem to enjoy each other's company. There was some concern about the program earlier this year due to the unmatched position of 2007 and the lack of a chair, but overall, everyone at Case seemed to agree that the department was on an upward slope. Several "strong" candidates had been interviewed for the chair position as of January. Standard didactics with weekly hour-long radbio and physics lectures. They do bring in a raphex question writer each spring for a shared review session with the Cleveland Clinic. Dr. Lyons, the PD, is extremely evidence-based and is reputed to know the breast literature better than many med oncs. She is also a strong resident advocate, resolving issues quickly and inviting the residents over to her house for dinner from time to time. Like many other institutions, Case is in the process of building a new cancer center - evidenced by a giant hole in the ground. As for location, Cleveland isn't a great beauty overall, but University Circle is actually quite nice. Marketed as the "cultural district" of Cleveland, University Circle is home to the Cleveland Orchestra, the art museum, the natural history museum and the botanical gardens.

William Beaumont

One of the rare "semi-academic" rad onc programs, Beaumont is currently unaffiliated with a medical school, although this is likely to change in the nearish future. From a technology standpoint: Wow. Under David Jaffray's (now at Princess Margaret) influence, this place became a leader in the IGRT world. As a major research site for Elekta, Beaumont not only has royalty rights on the Axesse, but it gets all of Elekta's toys. They have a 6D couch, 11+ physicists, some of the best adaptive planning tools in the business.... For anyone who is interested in IGRT or basic physics research, this is a great place to be. The program also provides a year of protected basic science research time, so you would have that as well.

From a clinical perspective, Beaumont has one of the highest patient volumes around, so numbers are not a problem. Martinez and Ghilezan run a very busy brachy service, putting catheters in darn near everything. Of note, nearly all prostate brachy is done HDR. Despite high patient numbers, though, residents usually get their attending's academic day "off" (of clinical duties), so the residents felt that they had plenty of time to read and/or do research. This is evidenced by the fact that nearly every Beaumont resident presents at ASTRO every year.

Despite only being "semi-academic," the Beaumont faculty are powerhouse publishers. Martinez and Vicini are both RTOG PIs with tons of publications. Vicini heads the B39 partial breast trial. The head of physics, Di Yan, also has a ton of publications to his name. As Martinez told me during my interview, he designed the program to "train leaders - regardless of what setting you practice in." He's a no-nonsense, slightly intimidating guy, but he obviously cares deeply about the program and gets things done.

Of note, Beaumont does have a mandatory transitional year attached to the program. Interns spend three months on the general medicine wards with additional time spent in uro, oto, general surgery, peds heme onc, adult heme onc and the ER. All in all, the residents seemed pretty happy with it and stated that they had "no complaints."

As for location, it's in Detroit. The better, ritzier part of Detroit....but still Detroit. Cold. Snowy. Economically depressed. Kind of suburban. If you can deal with that, this is a fantastic program.
 
My impressions are pretty much based on a gut feeling I had after the interview. I didn't have a great understanding of each program, the famous people or their equipment before this bizarre match process began. I did read old "impressions" beforehand, and I will try to point out where I agree and disagree with the past.

University of Wisconsin, Madison
Facilities: No concerns. Very nice, new cancer center. Faculty: Pleasant and seem to have a truly great relationship with the residents. Didn't really like the idea of the 5 versus 1 interview before the interview, but it did cut down on time and was no big deal really. Two 15-minute interviews! That's it. I don't know if they really get to know you this way, though. PD: Very dedicated to resident training. They might get a slight beat-down during conference, but it really seems like a very safe environment&#8230; and it's not meant to stress/bum you out. The teaching/training seemed like the best around. The residents like it. Chair: Hard to say, only know him through my brief interview. Residents: Very cool bunch and happy. They like the faculty and the program. They were very enthusiastic on the tour. Location: Not ideal, small town feel, that's for sure. Cold, snowy&#8230;maybe the summer is nice. Overall, I ended up ranking Wisconsin pretty highly because of the quality training, great faculty and strong research opportunities. Oh, they did pay for the hotel! Thanks!

UCSF
The facilities are older, but the space is still very nice. The faculty are great. I had more fun talking to Sue Yom than any other interview on the trail. Really, this is one place where politics seem to be at a minimum&#8230;almost zero. The program director, Dr. Haas-Kogan, is fantastic&#8230;she's a huge plus for the residents. The attendings were pretty busy on interview day, digging out after a long weekend or a vacation, I think. The residents were really nice and spoke with us nearly every chance they could get. They are happy, enthusiastic and very personable. They are also very honest about what it takes to be a UCSF resident (a self-starter). Location: San Francisco is awesome. The faculty are very supportive of the Holman Pathway, but you have to get it rolling yourself. Overall, I felt there were issues with organization that were apparent on our interview day (no formal welcome, no folder with department information, etc), but the faculty and residents and SF were so great I easily forgot about it. I have no way to judge didactics. Again, we need to hear from those who did rotations at UCSF. I left feeling very positive about the program.

Stanford
The facilities were new & shiny & fancy feeling&#8230;very impressive. Resident room was pretty small considering it's a new facility. The faculty were professional and easy going. Lots of big names, of course. Some of them were quirky, but in a cool, graduate school kinda way. I will never forget Dr. Kapp's piles and piles of papers in his office. Wow!!! There were too many interviews (13 25-minute interviews). I had a bad cold that day and barely pulled this one off. I lost my voice around 4:30 pm and couldn't make it to hang out with the residents afterwards. Get some sleep before this interview&#8230;you are gonna work. The PD, Dr. Gibbs was very nice and truly excited about her job, the residents and her research. The co-PD (I think), Dr. Donaldson (= famous), was very interesting to interview with. She really wants to find out if you are serious about Stanford. I got the sense that she cares tremendously about the residents. We were told that Stanford does not tell applicants where they rank and that there's no benefit in contacting them. Who knows if that is true or not&#8230; while I couldn't go out with the residents afterwards, from my time with them between interviews, I didn't get the sense they were the happiest bunch&#8230;as has been said before. I didn't pick up much excitement or enthusiasm from them. Maybe it's the scutwork&#8230;maybe they just aren't that into it&#8230;or maybe they are doing just fine, but just don't put on the smiles&#8230;who knows...would love to hear from those who did a rotation there. Palo Alto is expensive and manicured, which is slightly bizarre if you are from a city. Weather is pretty darn amazing, though. Overall, I really loved the place. Seemed like a class-act to me. Opportunities everywhere. Holman Pathway if you want it.

Harvard
The facilities are awesome. Faculty: Very famous, yet still pretty nice in general. Interviewing with Drs. Zietman and Loeffler was too fun. I had a couple of awkward interviews, but not bad overall. The two-day interview is exhausting. However, the Longwood side was more relaxed in general. Harvard is just more intimidating than some of the other places because it's Harvard, not because of anyone in particular. Any politics that might exist did not come through on interview day. The chair, Dr. Harris, was very nice and extremely proud of his program and residents. The chief residents were really amazing guys. True leaders. Most of the other residents were very cool people, maybe a little boring. I didn't sense any resident stress and their morning conferences were not malignant in the slightest. Location: Boston is a fun city. Cold, though. Great city if you are single. hmm&#8230;don't know why, but it's hard for me to say much about this program. Maybe it's almost perfect? (I am not!)

UTSW
The facilities here are brand new. Very nice! Faculty: Dr. Timmerman was a blast to meet with. He's dedicated to clinical training and made it clear that he wants to train great clinicians. Got the feeling that he and Dr. Choy weren't on the same page, but felt that they complement each other quite well. Dr. Choy is focused on research. The younger faculty were very interested in resident training and research. Drs. Outlaw and Nedzi stood out for me, very young, exciting faculty. Also met with a dosimetrist, the chief radiation therapist and a nurse administrator in an interview format, who were all very nice. This was very useful (and unique) as they were very honest about the work environment (it's great). The PD, Dr. Spangler was very friendly, polite and clearly cares tremendously about the residents and the program. She sets up a nice, collegial environment for the department. The chair, Dr. Choy is fired up! It's awesome. I had a great time meeting him. He definitely pushes you regarding your research and future goals during the interview. He went on and on about making UTSW a leader in the field and making his residents leaders as well. He's doing it. He's looking for good people to take advantage of the opportunities at UTSW. They have the money and the drive. The residents: Didn't sense strong enthusiasm and they were pretty difficult to read. Location: I happen to really like Dallas. It's not the best place to live, but it's a pretty cool city. Too many freeways, I suppose, but great food and plenty to do. I left feeling UTSW is an awesome place to train and has a bright future.

Fox Chase
Facilities: Fantastic! Might have a chip on their shoulder about not having protons, but whatever&#8230;Fox Chase is still awesome. Faculty: Very likable and laid back. This place is the complete opposite of malignant. PD: Dr. Freedman is fantastic. He really cares about his residents. I had a great time interviewing with him and the chief resident. Chair: Dr. Horowitz is young and very motivated despite having big shoes to fill&#8230;he doesn't seem phased by it at all. We talked about sports for half the interview. Residents: The best residents I met on the entire trail. Loved them. They are enthusiastic, hard working and they kept it real. No snobbery here. They publish like mad. Location: Not great&#8230;it's quite a ways out of town in a slightly sketchy suburb. Residents do live in downtown Philly, though and do the reverse commute without problems. Overall I really liked Fox Chase. There are tons of research opportunities and it shows in the resident's publication lists. They also have amazing staff to help with clinical work&#8230;very little scut here. The only downside is location.

UC Davis
Facilities: they were ok. Faculty: A few of them were strange (no eye contact, etc.). The others were fantastic. Some of the younger faculty are very enthusiastic. PD: Dr. Chen is awesome. He's pumped and wants to make a great program. Chair: Hard to say much about Dr. Vilacente. He just arrived from Jefferson the day prior to our interviews. The interview with him was slightly awkward. He will determine if UC Davis straightens out. Residents: Enthusiastic, but they clearly didn't like Sacramento. They were very friendly. Happy, too. Location: Not great. Sacramento leaves much to be desired. It's pretty close to some great places, though. Overall, I would have ranked them higher if I knew what tone Dr. Vilacente was going to set. If he's on the same page as the amazing Dr. Allen Chen, then I believe UC Davis is going to be a great place to train.

City of Hope
Facilities: lots of plans to build&#8230;lots of walls will soon be knocked out for what will be a very beautiful department. Faculty: Very pleasant for the most part. Hard to tell if they all get along. PD: Dr. Pezner wasn't the most pleasant guy to meet with, but he did really push me on "why radiation oncology?" &#8230;have to say, it was actually a good conversation and I was glad to be pushed on the subject for a change. I think he is very dedicated to teaching and will make sure residents know their stuff. Chair: Dr. Wong is a very nice chair and has wonderful plans for this new program. He's clearly dedicated to having a successful program. Residents: Didn't really get to speak with them. Location: Duarte, CA&#8230;basically Los Angeles&#8230;too many freeways and heavy traffic for me&#8230; It's a small program, so you'll get lots of one-on-one, but gosh, having fellow residents would be nice. Oh, it's not like they have never trained residents before. They used to have the UC Irvine residents come through, but now they have their own program!

University of Chicago
The facilities were fine&#8230;a very nice clinical center. Faculty: For the most part, pretty personable. Some of the interviewers weren't completely invested in the process. PD: Very good guy. Clearly cares about his residents. Chair: Don't know&#8230;only saw Dr. Weichselbaum at morning conference. Dr. Hellman definitely sets the tone at conference. This is old school. Residents appeared a little stressed out and rushed around in the morning preparing for the case. Conference was not much of an open conversation: faculty versus 2 residents (one presents the case, the other gets questioned&#8230;both standing at the head of the table &#8211; awkward). It wasn't too bad, really. They have quite a few presentations to prepare at the PGY-2 level. However, it did seem like great training if that's your learning style. The physicist, Dr. Stepaniak, is fantastic and he has a nice physics curriculum going. Residents: Some of them seemed a little bummed out. During our pre-interview dinner, quite a few residents sat at a table by themselves and appeared to be commiserating together. One resident told me you have to have "lots of inner fortitude" to make it here. Another resident joked to the applicants, "It's not that scary here." The research opportunities were great, but you currently have to do it during the fourth year. Conclusion: I really wanted to like this place, but was scared away.

Jefferson
Seems to have completely kicked the malignant reputation. Dr. Dicker is a funny guy and has a unique sense of humor&#8230;he's blunt that's for sure. He's serious about research and resident training. I hope he stays on as chair. The rest of the faculty were great to speak with. Very motivated and enthusiastic. Residents were down to earth and fun at dinner. They clearly like their program now and don't miss the old days. It's in downtown Philly&#8230;much better than suburban Philly. Wow&#8230;I really wish Fox Chase were in town. Overall, there are tons of opportunities here and Dr. Dicker will help you build a career. It's full of good people and the atmosphere was great.
 
I'll trickle in my contributions to this thread over the next few weeks. During the height of the interview insanity, my note taking suffered, so some reviews will be better than others ;). I'm a MD/PhD looking to do bench research in residency (considering Holman, but haven't decided one way or the other), so that certainly colors my perspective on how I looked at these programs.
 
University of Michigan

Interview day: Loooong. Started at 7:15 AM, with nine ~25 min interviews before a late lunch. Candidates had three 30 minute breaks scatter throughout, but the interviewers essentially powered through 12 straight interviews, ending with a late lunch. Thought this would be as brutal as it got until Stanford upped the ante to 13 interviews&#8230;Nice dinner the night before, ample time to meet the residents. Lab tour at the end of the long day could be cut, even for folks interested in the lab side of things&#8230;

PD/Chair: As has been mentioned previously on these forums, Ted Lawrence is fantastic. While he is a strong supporter of basic research, he hammers the theme of training clinicians first and foremost. This program seemed to have a rep for producing academics exclusively, but Lawrence spent a bit of time pointing out that they've sent recent grads to private practice, and that while they certainly encourage academics, they are supportive of all career paths. Word to the wise &#8211; Lawrence asked surprisingly pointed questions about how I would make decisions about the programs. Edgar Ben-Josef is the PD, seemed nice enough, but I didn't come away with a very strong impression one way or the other.

Location: An obvious huge knock against this program. One the positive side, Ann Arbor seemed nice, and was described as family friendly, and having "1 of everything, but not 2 or 3" (i.e. ethnic restaurants, particular stores, etc.). Most residents have bought houses, and live within 3 miles of the hospital &#8211; many bike to work. Possible to buy a large house in a subdivision, but key to stay in the Ann Arbor school districts. However, there's no avoiding the fact that the region has taken a devastating economic hit. Heard tales of residents being underwater on their homes / unable to sell &#8211; maybe a good time to buy there, but if you're bringing a spouse/SO looking for a non-medical job, the climate is daunting, to say the least. Also, cold.

Research: A very research friendly program. One year dedicated, and the department definitely supports Holman. They structure the Holman timing a little differently &#8211; rather than enter the lab at the end of PGY2, you do 18 months in the clinic first, which theoretically gives you more time to get a clinical foothold, and to figure out what disease site you like treating. When you return, you're close to graduation, so your research might a little fresher for faculty job purposes, and, in your last year, you can tailor your rotations to your interests or clinical weaknesses.

Residents:A good group, overall seemed happy, although 1 or 2 seemed to be a bit less enthusiastic. Senior resident Joe Contessa was particularly impressive &#8211; Holman pathway who has evidently carved out a niche in EGFR signaling and glycosylation. The residents claim a very laid back environment in general, and are on a first name basis with all the attendings but one. May need to be a bit more proactive to get things done as a resident - one offered the summary that "you get out what you put in." The residents feel that the program is pretty responsive to their feedback.

Workload: My understanding coming in was that Michigan had a rep as a program with a high workload, arising from volume and scut, with a possible contribution from their in-house treatment planning software (which is billed as "great for research" but sounds cumbersome). It was claimed that this is improving for a variety of reasons, including declining patient volume, and the addition of training slots to add more residents to the program. Also, they've hired more physician extenders, who are supposedly doing almost all the follow-up visits. Still, sounds like a place with a workload that can run to the high side, with days running past 9 on busy services (ENT). No problems getting case numbers, even for Peds.

Didactics: morning conferences 4 days a week, one dedicated to physics, the others are resident-driven presentations. There are also Friday afternoon lectures. Physics is taught to the R2s and R4s.

Service structure / coverage: 3 month rotations, covering 2 (and occasionally 3 attendings), but evidently, most attendings have clinic only twice a week, so likely only one on a given day. Most attendings cover ~2 sites, with the notable exception of Eisbrook (the head and neck maven). Most of the rotations are at the University Hospital, with some rotations at the VA and one with brachy 2 days a week at a satellite facility &#8211; the program provides the use of a car for those months (and gas).

Random details: One resident randomly opined that Ted Lawrence doesn't get along with MDACC, so that if you come to UM, "you'll never work at MDA." Salary is about 51k per year for the PGY2s. As has been noted elsewhere, the Michigan program has now eliminated the brutal categorical intern year.

OVERALL: An impressive academic program with Lawrence at the helm and a proven track record of producing successful junior faculty and a great support from research from a chair who values it. Lots of faculty in various stages of their careers to seek mentorship from, but you need to be proactive. Workload has been high in the past, purported to be improved, and possibly get even better; onerous intern year a thing of the past.
 
congrats class of 2009, the interview impressions are really helpful. keep them coming!!
 
Any more impressions? They are very helpful.
 
Ask and ye shall receive...


Fox Chase Cancer Center



Interview day: Well-structured interview day, starting with dinner w/ the residents the night before. FCCC has adopted sort of a modified panel approach, which I thought worked extremely well. Each interview consists of 2 faculty, and you. Thus, you get a chance to meet everyone in the department, but you don’t have to suffer through a 14 interview gauntlet (here’s looking at you Stanford). Two interviewers is very manageable, and didn’t have the intimidation factor of the MDACC-style one-shot panel interview.

PD/Chair: The PD here is one who really stood out to me as a resident advocate; resident education really seems to come first.
PD emphasized how flexible they are – very happy to make changes if they’re reasonable. One resident was considering using the PGY4 research year to do an MBA, which was supposedly going to fly, before she ultimately decided against it.

The interim chair, Horwitz, also came across as very friendly and laid-back – we spent the majority of the interview talking about the NFL playoff race and the Phillies. On topic, he further emphasized the collegial environment of the department, and reiterated his commitment to resident research time. (FWIW, the current R4’s are on a research year promised by Pollack, but honored by Horwitz). Chair is a young guy, focused on prostate, and VP of brachy society,.

Location: FCCC is located kind of on the northern outskirts of Philly. Cost of living seems to be pretty reasonable – One resident reported buying a 4 bedroom house, 10 minutes from work, and several of the single types live in Center City Philadelphia, and report paying ~800’s for 2 bedroom apts downtown.

Research: Very-well supported here, with a dedicated year available.
Residents are very productive, lots of ASTRO work. One of the residents, Peter Morgan, just published that paper on productivity index, which I heard about 4-5 times – FCCC residents rank 3rd FWIW
Two MD/PhD R4s doing a year in the lab, working with the inventors of Y2H and tamoxifen, respectively. One opined that he was deciding between MSK and FCCC, and came here b/c of their commitment to the residents ability to do research. The Holman pathway would be supported here – neither of the two current R4’s ended up pursuing it, but both the PD and chair would ok it. Somewhat incongruously, you do seem take call during your research year, but given that its q8 weeks and pretty light, not such a big deal. Only drawback here is that, while FCCC has big-time researchers (2 Nobel Laureates on faculty, plus Knudson), FCCC is a smaller institution overall – so there may be fewer options if you have a specific bench interest.

Residents: A very friendly group, with what seems to be a great culture of supporting each other, e.g. one resident who lives close by will occasionally pop in on non-call weekends to cover a 20 minute treat, sparing the Center City folks from a long round-trip. Residents were very happy with the department’s close-knit culture. Lots of group social events (e.g. residents vs. attendings softball games, “journal club” / wii playing at the PD’s house. They say that the attendings will pimp the crap out of you, but do so respectfully, with education in mind, and will show up later that afternoon having pulled the article you need to read.

Workload: Sounds like most residents work 8-5, with exceptions for somewhat busier services like ENT. Call is q8-9 weeks, and sounds very light – essentially, the call person stays until the machines stop running (~7PM), but it sounds like another resident will generally make sure to be in by 7, so call ends up being 8-7 most weekdays. Weekends are typically very light (~3 calls), particularly since there is no attached EC for people to come into. Scut is purportedly minimal to non-existent. Residents report that the nursing/support staff is particularly excellent with respect to call, triaging phone contacts so that they don’t get called on things that are non-emergent, but were indiscriminately put through by the page operator. Also, all the computer stuff is available by remote access: including treatment planning, dictation editing, and online journals.


Equipment: I’m not usually one to obsess over who has which version of what machine, but for some reason, I wrote it down here: Department is undergoing its 2nd remodeling in less than a decade. A new building is going up adjacent, scheduled to open July 2009, and department will expand/relocate from basement + first floor of current building to entire basement of both. Will have 7 LINACS, up from 6, with an empty vault in reserve. All the machines are being replaced, so the oldest machines in the new building will be from 2005. Cyberknife coming to satellite facility which is being built and set to open next year, no current plans for residents to go there, but if there proves to be some educational value (ie, perhaps increased CNS service), they may offer that option. . Trilogy, CT on rails, rapidarc, on board CT, calypso, etc, with the exception of protons. CT and MR sim, dedicated PET/CT sim on the way.


Didactics: Wednesday afternoon is lectures 3-6: Physics, Radbio, clinical lecture. Conferences mornings at 8 AM. They take this protected time very seriously. Residents leave services at 2:55, no questions asked, on Wednesdays, and the nurses know not to page residents during the 8 AM hour. 2 oral boards examiners among the faculty, including the PD, so mock oral boards hew reasonably close to the real thing. Written in-service every year as self-assessment tool. The PD has actually developed a syllabus of sorts for his rotation – he gives the residents a binder full of papers at the beginning of the rotation, and goes through 1 topic a week during a ~1 hour session on his academic day. (Residents take academic days the same time as their attendings).


Service structure / coverage: Clinical rotations are 3 months, covering one attending only. PGY4 year is the chief year, freeing the PGY5s to interview for jobs etc. No Peds at FCCC – residents do a 1 month rotation at CHOP across town. Otherwise, good volume, 140 patients on treatment at any given time. Claim to do a good amount of brachy for GYN/GU. Can do a month or two at Temple if you want to see horrendomas and other locally advanced disease.



Random details: Tons of perks here! Free food – 3 meals a day – in the adjacent hospital cafeteria. Food was a recurring theme, with ample free food also around at various birthday parties, conferences, etc. Day care is reported to be awesome, subsidized by FCCC. Nationally certified program, for whatever that’s worth, subsidized based on salary. One resident reported paying $150 a week for two kids. Day care is claimed to open early / close late as needed for your work schedule as a FCCC employee. Residents get TONS of time to travel / vacation. R2s have to stay behind to cover clinics, but everyone else goes to ASTRO as long as they have even submitted an abstract. Everyone is sent to at least one other meeting a year, and residents average 2-3. $600 per year for books/educational expenses, half of which can be spent towards annual payment towards oral boards fees. All the residents get 3 major textbooks upon arrival.


Vacation is 20 days per year, which is on top of 6-8 major holidays (Labor Day, July 4, Christmas, etc). When the department is closed for days like this year, 12/26, Christmas on a Thursday, residents get a bonus day off.

OVERALL: All in all a fantastic place, which ended up pretty high on my list.
Close-knit program in a dedicated cancer center with all the toys, providing rigorous clinical training with a minimum of scut, great travel and benefits, and very lifestyle friendly (8-5, with ample remote access). Residents are genuinely supported by the PD and chair, and attendings are used to being without resident coverage to run their services. Residents come out extremely well-published and well-networked. A year of protected research is no problem, and Holman would be supported. Arguably less name recognition, although the department certainly seems well plugged into ASTRO/RTOG/ECOG, etc. Requisite knock for the inherent uncertainty of the chair situation, and possibly light on zebras and horrendomas.
 
University of Florida:
Absolutely no idea why this program gets any hype, definitely one of the most overrated programs I interviewed at, if not THE most overrated, but then again I did not interview at UCSF. First of all let me say that Gainesville is remote…definitely a college town at best. I am relatively young for this stage in training, currently 25, and honestly at the dinner I felt old given the rest of the restaurant patrons all looked like they were 18 (and likely were not far off). The facilities were old, and not nice at all, additionally the faculty acted like they were the second coming. They might as well have been wearing t-shirts that said, “we think our program is better than you.” The interviews consisted of small panel interviews, 3-4 people a piece, and in one of them a faculty member (that will go unnamed) was actually returning emails on her blackberry as I talked. Honestly, who does that? Obviously I was pretty boring, and she let me know it. The other very important thing to realize is that yes, they have protons, but they are a good two hours away in Jacksonville, and you are expected to spend 6 months there!!! Ha!!! If you are single, great, you can really work the FL scene (which I must say is nice). However if you are married get ready to commute like there is no tomorrow (4hrs a day) or spend weeks away from your wife/husband. And don’t kid yourself; it’s a solid 2 hour drive with tons of speed traps on the way. Not a place I would be happy to be.

Penn:
Amazing, without question one of the best programs out there. There is a lot on the forum about it so I won’t say much but I just wanted to echo the fact that this program is incredible. Brand name as it gets, but without any “I am better than you” attitude from the faculty.

Columbia:
Ok, let’s get one thing straight, Columbia will always be a head turning name in medicine, and NYC absolutely rocks. That being said for some stupid reason the probation thing here really really bothered me. I just kept thinking I did not work so hard in med school (graduating AOA, tons of pubs, 250+ steps, blah blah blah) to be in a residency program with a history of recent probation. With Cliff Chao on board things could change quickly, however it was too risky for my blood.

U Wisconsin:
Also a lot of talk on the forum so I won’t clog things up, but this program is also incredible. And Madison is pretty nice. Very nice faculty and Minesh Mehta is my idol, literally.

Beaumont:
Yea, so Detroit is really as bad as they say it is. Don’t let them fool you, “Royal Oaks” is a suburb of Detroit. It is also terrible. If you can get over Detroit, then this is actually a pretty sweet program with plenty of volume, and awesome physics research. Overall Beaumont is an impressive Rad Onc name…but an issue for me was the real lack of name recognition among in medicine in general. The usual response I got from friends was you’re interviewing at Beau…what? I did not want colleagues to be asking me for my career you did your residency at Beau...what? Stupid reason, I know, but a person hang up. Whether or not you like it names matter. If you don’t care about where you live for 5 years, or about names, then you will get great training at this program, and your Rad Onc colleagues will think highly of it. Oh and also a prelim medicine year…terrible.



Emory:
I am very surprised that this program does not get more talk on the SDN forums. Comically I went down there thinking it must not be very good given its lack of SDN rep, I left thinking SDN missed a real gem. I will fill things in:

Overall it’s a pretty “brand name” institution in a decent city with a variety of impressive features. Currently it has a new chair, Walter Curran, who is also chairman of RTOG and well known in the field, he just came from Jefferson. He seems to be known as a “mover and shaker” but a very nice and personable guy overall. He seemed that way in person, definitely someone you could talk to. The program is spread over multiple large hospitals (Emory essentially dominates Atlanta academic medicine) however every hospital is within 5 miles of each other, making commuting back and fourth pretty easy, and you get covered parking at each place. Additionally each Friday is entirely devoted to resident didactics/lectures and is held at the main hospital campus (which I must say was nice and right near the undergrad Campus). Also it’s a big resident class with 3/year and the residents seemed very happy with the didactics. The facilities were impressive and pretty new, with lots of technology including HDR and LDR Brachytherapy, Rapid Arc, and Novalis. It’s a Varian beta site so it gets new technology frequently as well. I don’t remember the exact numbers but they had plenty of patients on treatment (I want to say 300+), no issues with peds, and with 16 rad/onc attendings it seemed to make for plenty of coverage, so you can keep your weekends open. The labs there were very very new and impressive, and located right near the department, with lots of basic science research opportunities if you want them. Several of the residents independently told me there were far far more research opportunities than residents who wanted them. Good for those of us that genuinely hope for a career in academics.

The Bad: Currently no protons, although Curran mentioned that is not at all “out of the financial abilities” of Emory. A categorical prelim medicine year…terrible.
 
I agree with the above post about Emory. For some reason nobody seems to talk about the program on these forums and I think people are missing out. I also agree that Florida is ridiculously overrated. I am not exagerrating when I say that they have 3 full time attendings at their "main campus" in Gainesville for all of the residents who are not currently doing their months long stint in Jacksonville. But I digress...

Emory - has to be considered among the top programs in the southeast with Duke and UAB. Dr. Curran (the chairman) has brought several new faculty both from Jefferson and beyond and the program really seems to be getting much more academic (I believe it was more clinical in the past). They mentioned impressive facts about how many patients are on protocol and how residents can become involved in RTOG clinical trials if they are interested.

One of the big beefs people seem to have are the 4 hospitals and the commuting. I view the 4 different settings as an advantage. Emory hospital is the standard academic tertiary care place. At Grady I got the sense that you get to see and treat patients with locally advanced tumors that are just not seen at non-county type hospitals. Actually when I interviewed at FCCC they told me they all try and do rotations at a similar type hospital at Temple just to be able to see these types of locally advanced tumors. The VA is the VA, and Crawford long really resembles a private practive type setting.

Everyone I met was very nice, very happy and happy with program. I actually have a friend who is a resident there who did what people on here have described as "the most terrible prelim year ever" and to be honest told me it really wasn't too bad - and actually pretty useful because you meet all of the attendings from other specialties and get to the know all of the hospitals along the way.

I put Emory very high on my match list, and would have put it higher if not for some geographical constraints, but I felt strongly that I needed to post my impressions of a very underrated program
 
I also agree that Florida is ridiculously overrated. I am not exagerrating when I say that they have 3 full time attendings at their "main campus" in Gainesville for all of the residents who are not currently doing their months long stint in Jacksonville.

How many residents go to jacksonville? If it is only 1-2, that would leave 6 residents for 3 faculty. Isn't that a problem for accreditation and resident education in general??
 
Emory - has to be considered among the top programs in the southeast with Duke and UAB.

Appreciate the comments on Emory. what did this year's interview crop think about these other "top" southeastern radonc programs?
 
University of Alabama at Birmingham

My notes on UAB are far less complete, but given the request for info on top SE programs, here goes nothing…

The interview day here frankly suffers a bit from its strange setup. No dinner with the residents the night before, which is fine, but also missing the pro forma welcome/intro/coffee session. Basically, we showed up in the lobby and hung out on our own for 15 minutes before the PD (Fiveash) came out and gave a 90 second spiel before jumping right into the interviews. Unlike many other programs, it was hard to get a feel for the environment before being in the thick of the interview process, and I found myself having to cover the basics (rotation structure, hospital coverage, etc). in the faculty interviews, when I usually had learned all that info by the comparable point in other programs’ itineraries. You got to have lunch with the residents after the interviews were done, but, all in all, I came away feeling like I hadn’t really had the chance to get to know any of the folks I would potentially be working with.

The department is set to move across the way to a shiny new cancer center, supposed to be open within the year. You spend some time at the pseudo-private facility, ~20 minutes away from the med center. UAB med campus is pretty sizeable compared to most.

The Chair, Dr. Bonner, has an active lab, and was the first author on the NEJM paper for Erbitux in head & neck, so suffice it to say that they have all the Erbitux they need for clinical trials. The department has not had a Holman, but would support one. I got the sense that they are seeking to build up the translational research arm of the department, and Bonner certainly brings the goods to lead the department in that direction if they so choose.

Might be over-generalizing, but this program seemed to have a more regional feel than others I visited. Certainly seems that, in coming from UAB, you would have your choice of private practice jobs in Alabama, if that’s where you’d like to be. Don’t seem to have a real track record in producing physician scientists. One current R5 is headed to Emory faculty IIRC.

Notably, the interview day here includes a session with the physics chief – a tall white-haired Austrian dude who throws down a gauntlet of physics pimping. “What is the role of the physics department? Which physicists did you work with on your away rotation? Define image guidance? Define a vector? What is Ohm’s law? What percentage of the GDP does the US spend on health care?” Etc., etc… And, all the while he’s (presumably) grading your answers on a hand-ruled tablet. This was much more benign than the preceding paragraph makes it sound, but was certainly memorable, to say the least.
 
Does anyone have information on UNC
 
Anybody interview at these programs and wish to share their opinions?

I am thinking about doing an away on the west coast.
 
Anybody interview at these programs and wish to share their opinions?

I am thinking about doing an away on the west coast.

I do not recommend going to UCI. Don't get me wrong, you will get a nice exp and the residents and attendings are great the only thing is that they are having trouble with their residency program b/c they do not have enough attendings at their home program (new regulations say you need a min of 4). They have a lot of satellite locations, but lost their best one - City of Hope. Oh yea btw, you should consider going to City of Hope for an away program, not to mention Kaiser LA, USC, and Loma Linda.

Remember away programs have 2 objectives

1) As an "audition" ie get your foot in the door at the particular program. UCI may not have a program, so I can't recommend it for right now.

2) To get LoR - If you know these attendings really well then it may very well be worth it, esp. if they will give you the bomb letter! But most likely you are not in that situation.

Note: Let me reiterate, the UCI program is good, but I just can't recommend it right now over the other schools.
 
UTSW

I was very disappointed with this program. I really wanted to like it because there are a lot of things to like about the program: The residents are great and like each other. The Vice Chair Dr Timmerman is fantastic. Seems like a genuinely well respected physician, researcher and mentor. There has been a fresh infusion of young talented faculty and it is well known throughout the country that the program has a lot of money to play with. Also, Dallas is an underrated city and other than MDACC there aren't many good programs in the south. but this program is dysfunctional.
It became pretty clear quite quickly that the residents do not respect the program director both as a physician and as a program director. She is not interested in bettering the residency program and from the sound of it she will be on the way out soon.
Much has been said on this forum previously about the chairman Dr. Choy. Some interviewees have been impressed in the past by his ability to sell his vision for the future of the program. I wasn't impressed. I felt like Dr. Choy is so focused on creating the most technologically advanced radiation oncology center in the country that he missed one of the most important aspects of his job... making sure his residents receive the best education possible. the fact of the matter is that Dr. Choy is a businessman first and a physician/educator second. If you are an investor then that is probably a good thing, but as a resident it is not ideal. Throw on top of that Dr. Choy's abrasive personality and that would make for a potentially long four years.
All in all when I heard that UTSW's program did not fill last year I wasn't surprised considering the dysfunction at the top of the program and Dr Choy's tendency to think too highly of the program.
 
I agree completely.

UTSW

I was very disappointed with this program. I really wanted to like it because there are a lot of things to like about the program: The residents are great and like each other. The Vice Chair Dr Timmerman is fantastic. Seems like a genuinely well respected physician, researcher and mentor. There has been a fresh infusion of young talented faculty and it is well known throughout the country that the program has a lot of money to play with. Also, Dallas is an underrated city and other than MDACC there aren't many good programs in the south. but this program is dysfunctional.
It became pretty clear quite quickly that the residents do not respect the program director both as a physician and as a program director. She is not interested in bettering the residency program and from the sound of it she will be on the way out soon.
Much has been said on this forum previously about the chairman Dr. Choy. Some interviewees have been impressed in the past by his ability to sell his vision for the future of the program. I wasn't impressed. I felt like Dr. Choy is so focused on creating the most technologically advanced radiation oncology center in the country that he missed one of the most important aspects of his job... making sure his residents receive the best education possible. the fact of the matter is that Dr. Choy is a businessman first and a physician/educator second. If you are an investor then that is probably a good thing, but as a resident it is not ideal. Throw on top of that Dr. Choy's abrasive personality and that would make for a potentially long four years.
All in all when I heard that UTSW's program did not fill last year I wasn't surprised considering the dysfunction at the top of the program and Dr Choy's tendency to think too highly of the program.
 
A lot of people know that I just finished training at UTSW.

Let me start off by saying that much of your observation is pretty accurate and I do appreciate your outside-looking-in insight because, well, it's hard to see a blot on your own face until someone points it out.

That being said, your impression is based on one morning's experience and interchange with a few residents, and I was there for four years. Well, here is my take.

I think you are wrong when you said having Dr. Choy would make for a potentially long four years because of his "abrasive" personality. I can tell you from my own experience and those of other residents that Dr. Choy is probably the most well loved attending (beside Dr. Pistenmaa who is just the nicest guy in the history of Western civilization) whose rotation we definitely enjoy the most. You could probably ask old residents from Vanderbilt who, I believe, will echo the same sentiment. You just have to put up with first two weeks of "breaking in" at the beginning of his rotation. He teaches a ton and teaches you skills you won't learn anywhere else --- including how to get med oncs to do what you want them to.

It is not to say that he doesn't comes across very abrupt --- unfiltered, perhaps --- on the interview day. I was taken aback myself when he said some like "well, that was stupid" or "your research is worthless" on multiple occasions. He doesn't have the usual interview decorum that you expect and he doesn't apologize for telling it like it is. Ask yourself, though. Do you really think that the 2 month project of chart biopsy you did as a medical student just so that you can have something on your CV wasn't stupid? Well, there.

It is true that he thinks greatly of the program and probably that arrogance didn't do the program any favor. As I mentioned earlier, that was the most crucial factor in us not filling last year. We interviewed way too few people for the number of spots we had and then went ahead added more spots. You won't find anyone who thinks that there was something inherently deficient in the program though.

I cannot disagree more that the education I received was not the best possible. The training I got was second-to-none in terms of being able to think critically through different clinical scenarios, substantiate my recommendation with evidence, read scans (not reports) thoroughly, and market myself for a job after the training. From where else can you say that you trained with Gammaknife, Cyberknife, Novalis, Trilogy, Synergy, 4D CT, cone beam CT, Calypso, etc. under one roof with Father of American SBRT (Dr. Timmerman) and the premier Novalis physicist (Dr. Solberg)? Where we were lacking was getting attendings to give powerpoint-style didactic presentations. I am not even sure if that's all that helpful.

The issue with the program director is totally overblown. I am not going to deny that there were some issues with her leadership last year. During the interview season, the residents were not very happy because they were going through some funding cut (even at UTSW!) where our travel reimbursement were hit pretty hard. Until then, we had been reimbursed the same amount as faculty (we all stayed at individual 5 star hotel rooms in Boston -- $300 per night) and they finally caught up with us... Oh, well. I enjoyed it while it lasted. She is interested in bettering the program, but the changes weren't implemented quickly enough for some residents' taste. However, we completely revamped the clinical conference this year, and, I'm told, everyone loves it. I don't think she's going to step down as a program director anytime soon.

There is a difference between telling it like it is and propagating heresay and wishes. I am quite upset, actually, that we residents did so much of the latter to give you the impression you got. At the end, I do think some of your observations were dead-on. I feel a bit embarrased that we were so transparent and didn't put up more of a show to sell the program like everyone else. I just wanted to balance your view with my own experience. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Top